Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Power of Proficiency Scaling ATI Summer 2014

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Power of Proficiency Scaling ATI Summer 2014"— Presentation transcript:

1 Power of Proficiency Scaling ATI Summer 2014
Everett Public Schools Power of Proficiency Scaling Jo Anne Buiteweg, Director of Learning Management Systems Jana Sanchez, STEM Mathematics Facilitator ATI Summer 2014

2 Entry Task Write down some of your thoughts for these two questions; be prepared to share. What does a “2” represent? (approaching proficiency) For a teacher? For a student? For a parent? For a transcript reviewer? What does a “4” represent? (beyond proficiency) Have participants share their thinking with and elbow partner. Have a few groups share their discussion with the whole group for each of the representative groups

3 “Clearly a better method for developing and scoring assessments is needed – one that ensures that the scale (the size of an inch) stays the same from one assessment to the next and that a teacher applies the same logic to scoring of each assessment.” Marzano, Robert J. Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading 2010

4 Session’s Overview How does“ Depth of Knowledge” (DOK) as defined by Norman Webb facilitate the implementation of standards-aligned program? How is the “Depth of Knowledge” a foundation for the construction of a proficiency scale to “unpack” clusters/ standards? How can we use the implementation of CCSS and NGSS as a way to infuse standards-focused practices? What implications does scaling have as the foundation for building leveled assessments and instructional plans? How can instructional leaders utilize proficiency scaling as a focal point for a more coherent system for curriculum, assessment and instruction? Print TM

5 Backwards Design Model
Identify/Select Course Standards “Common Core” Scale Standards Design/Use Common “Leveled” Assessments Instructional Plan/Map Determine Reporting Variables Develop Interventions/Enrichment

6 Norman Webb’s Depth of Knowledge
Adapted from the model used by Norm Webb, University of Wisconsin, to align standards with assessments The degree of depth or complexity of knowledge reflected in the content standards and assessments How deeply a student needs to understand the content for a given response/assessment

7 Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
Addresses the content being assessed and the depth to which we expect students to demonstrate understanding of that content. Is a reference to the complexity of mental processing that must occur to answer a question, perform a task, or generate a product Is about cognitive complexity, not difficulty Is not grade contextualized Offers a pathway to rigor

8 Webb’s I did not create the DOK wheel. I believe someone in Florida used my work to create the DOK wheel. Because the wheel is not mine, I cannot grant or deny its use.   I think the DOK chart is misleading and I do not recommend its use. Depth of Knowledge depends on more than the verb. The complexity also depends on what the verb is acting on. For example, “draw” is in the DOK level 1 sector. But a student who draws a blueprint of a new building is doing more than recall of information. Explain also can be at different levels--explain by repeating a definition (DOK level 1), explain by putting a paragraph into your own words (DOK level 2), or explain by describing an analysis of the factors contributing to the economic down turn of the US (DOK level 3).   So I cannot provide you the requested permission and, in fact, I discourage you from using the DOK wheel. It is a simplification of my work that does not fully represent the issues of content complexity. The only possible use of the chart I can see is if someone took a verb and ask how it could be placed in each of the four sectors.   I did create the definitions similar to the shorten version at the bottom of the chart. I have attached shorten definitions that you are free to use.I hope these are useful. I am sorry I do not have a precise graphic such as the wheel. Created based on work of Webb, Norman L. and others. “Web Alignment Tool” 24 July Wisconsin Center of Educational Research. University of Wisconsin-Madison. 2 Feb. 2006

9 Explain also can be at different levels--explain
Depth of Knowledge depends on more than the verb. The complexity also depends on what the verb is acting on. For example, “draw” is in the DOK level 1 sector. But a student who draws a blueprint of a new building is doing more than recall of information. Explain also can be at different levels--explain by repeating a definition (DOK level 1), explain by putting a paragraph into your own words (DOK level 2), or explain by describing an analysis of the factors contributing to the economic down turn of the US (DOK level 3). Correspondence from Norman Webb – cautioning use of the wheel.

10

11 Bloom’s and Webb’s Different models to describe cognitive rigor
Bloom – What type of thinking (verbs) are needed to complete the task? Webb – How deeply do you have to understand the content to successfully interact at a given depth? How complex is the content?

12 Cognitive Rigor Matrix
This matrix from the Smarter Balanced Content Specifications for Mathematics draws from both Bloom’s (revised) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and Webb’s Depth-of-Knowledge Levels below. The depth of knowledge levels defined by Smarter Balanced are informed by the Cognitive Rigor matrix. The Cognitive Rigor matrix combines two common taxonomies that categorize levels of cognition and shows how the Smarter Balanced depth of knowledge categories relate to these taxonomies. Here, the concept of remembering information only relates to the first depth of knowledge level. In contrast, evaluation does not relate to either of the first two levels of depth of knowledge. This table, which can be found in the Smarter Balanced Content Specifications for Mathematics, is a useful aid for guiding the development of items at different depth of knowledge levels. Now let’s examine the content specifications.

13 What do you think makes each of these tasks a different DOK level if it is not about the verb?

14 DOK Levels 4: Extended Thinking 1: Recall 2: 3: Strategic Thinking
Skill /Concept 3: Strategic Thinking

15 Depth of Knowledge Recall— Identify this utensil.
Concept— Explain the function of the fork. Strategic— Identify two examples of when a fork would not be the best utensil for a type of food and explain why. Extended— Design an investigation to determine the optimal number and length of tines for a salad fork. This example is meant to provide a simple, academic example of the difference between the Webb levels. It is meant to mirror the basic labels provided for each level on the first Webb slide. Level 1 – Recognizing and identifying a fork is at the factual recall level of understanding and application of the “concept” of a utensil. Level 2 - Requires a relatively simple level of understanding of how a fork functions and the skill of translating that understanding into an explanation. Level 3 - Requires some analysis and connecting to the understanding of forks and food to generate a conclusion and explanation for a real situation. Level 4 – Requires a deeper and more involved application of the understanding of forks as part of a complex investigation. From: Lois Barnes SREB/HSTW

16 Depth of Knowledge Recall— Identify the type of tree.
Concept— Explain the function of the leaves. Strategic— Explain how a drought might affect the growth of the tree. Extended— Design an investigation of seedling growth to determine the best fertilizer for this type of tree. This example is meant to provide a simple, academic example of the difference between the Webb levels. It is meant to mirror the basic labels provided for each level on the first Webb slide. Level 1 – Recognizing and identifying a type of tree (coniferous, deciduous, etc.) is at the factual recall level of understanding and application of the “concept” of a tree. Level 2 - Requires a relatively simple level of understanding of how a tree functions and the skill of translating that understanding into an explanation. Level 3 - Requires some analysis and connecting to the understanding of trees to generate a conclusion and explanation for a real situation. Level 4 – Requires a deeper and more involved application of the understanding of trees as part of a complex investigation. From: Lois Barnes SREB/HSTW

17 Card Sort Activity? Working with an elbow partner label each task/prompt with the appropriate DOK level and justify your decision.

18 Cognitive Complexity vs Difficulty
What is the difference between Cognitive Complexity and Difficulty Level? Difficulty refers to how many students answered the question correctly. High Order Thinking refers to how many steps it takes to answer the question. Add: 4,678,895+ 9,578,885 What is the DOK?

19 DOK Snapshot DOK is a scale of cognitive demand
DOK is not an exact science DOK is not about difficulty but how much thinking is required for the student to complete the prompt/task DOK is about the item/standard not the student The context of the item/standard must be considered to determine the DOK level not just a look at what verb was chosen. DOK is lowered when too much information is given *Break*

20 How can we be consistent in applying DOK at our grade level?
Depth of Knowledge = Cognitive Demand = Rigor How much and what kind of “thinking” is called for in each CCSS cluster, for classroom instruction and on assessments? What kinds of “thinking” is called for approaching the cluster and beyond the cluster?

21 Proficiency Scaling The process of identifying and developing the cognitive demand or level of rigor for a given standard. Starting with the standard: educators use a framework … (Bloom’s, Costa’s , Webb’s DOK or combination) …as way to build “a rigorous rubric-based approach in the interest of valid and reliable assessing” which informs both teacher and student If Proficient is the standard: What is Advanced? What is a Basic? Marzano, Robert J. Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading 2010

22 Common Core Grades K Grades 1 Grades 2
Understand addition as putting together and adding to, and understand subtraction as taking apart and taking from. 1. Represent addition and subtraction with objects, fingers, mental images, drawings2, sounds (e.g., claps), acting out situations, verbal explanations, expressions, or equations. 2. Solve addition and subtraction word problems, and add and subtract within 10, e.g., by using objects or drawings to represent the problem. 3. Decompose numbers less than or equal to 10 into pairs in more than one way, e.g., by using objects or drawings, and record each decomposition by a drawing or equation (e.g., 5 = and 5 = 4 + 1). 4. For any number from 1 to 9, find the number that makes 10 when added to the given number, e.g., by using objects or drawings, and record the answer with a drawing or equation. Represent and solve problems involving addition and subtraction. 1. Use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem.2 2. Solve word problems that call for addition of three whole numbers whose sum is less than or equal to 20, e.g., by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. Use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. TM

23 Proficiency Scale Advanced Cognitive task extending from standard; requiring decision-making, expressing reasoning, or applying what has been explicitly taught in new contexts Proficient Standard as defined by the state including expectations for content, process, skills, and/or performance to be explicitly taught. Basic Cognitive step just before standard that is explicitly taught; includes concepts broken into distinct segments, foundational skills and key vocabulary. Foundational With help, partial success of Basic or Proficient content and/or elements preceding Basic level. Print TM

24 Proficiency Scale level
does not equal DOK level Recall/ Reproduction DOK 1 Skills/ Concepts DOK 2 DOK 3 Strategic Thinking Extended Thinking DOK 4 We’ll show you an example …

25 Proficiency Scale K-Math Advanced Proficient Basic Foundational
Cognitive task extending from standard; requiring decision-making, expressing reasoning, or applying what has been explicitly taught in new contexts Count backwards from a given number by ones. Write numbers from various starting points beyond 20 and continue the number pattern. Write given numbers out of sequence above 20. Proficient Standard as defined by the state including expectations for content, process, skills, and/or performance to be explicitly taught. Know number names and the count sequence. (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS) Count to 100 by ones (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS.1) Count to 100 by tens (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS.1) Count forward beginning from a given number within the known sequence (instead of having to begin at 1). (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS.2) Write numbers from 0 to 20. (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS.2) Represent a number of objects with a written numeral 0-20 (with 0 representing a count of no objects). (MTH.K.CC.KNNCS.3) Basic Cognitive step just before standard that is explicitly taught; includes concepts broken into distinct segments, foundational skills and key vocabulary Uses the pattern of 1-9 to count within a decade (e.g. in twenties, in thirties, etc) Writes numbers from 0 to 20 using a tool (e.g. number line, 100s chart) Represents a number of objects with a visual tool 0-20 (refer to a number line or number card). Recognizes the numbers from 0 to 20. Foundational With help, partial success of Basic or Proficient content and/or elements preceding Basic level. Print TM

26 Proficiency Scale Advanced Cognitive task extending from standard; requiring decision-making, expressing reasoning, or applying what has been explicitly taught in new contexts Proficient Standard as defined by the state including expectations for content, process, skills, and/or performance to be explicitly taught. Basic Cognitive step just before standard that is explicitly taught; includes concepts broken into distinct segments, foundational skills and key vocabulary. Foundational With help, partial success of Basic or Proficient content and/or elements preceding Basic level. Print TM

27 Difference Between Scales and Rubrics
Scales are built for teachers use in planning assessments and instruction Scales are tied to standard – independent of performance task Basic tasks are deliberate performance expectations not written to be “lacking” or “missing” proficient elements Rubrics are tied to specific performance expectations Rubrics are smaller picture Proficiency Scales are the bigger picture Print TM

28 Build Summative Assessments and Assessment Maps
Reliable and Valid Items/Prompts aligned to standards Items/Prompts leveled Scoring and reporting variables determined Formative Assessment being used correctly Fix 7: Don’t organize by type but by standard Fix 8: Don’t grade unclear standards; provide clear expectations Fix 10: Don’t rely on weak assessments; use quality assessments

29 Leveraging Scaling Scaling and Leveling
Rigorous, Informative Assessment Scaling and Leveling Curriculum & Instruction Reporting Variables/ Grading Practices

30 Schimmer’s Key Questions
Emphasize COMPLETION or STANDARDS? Is school about ACTIVITIES or LEARNING? Is school about POINTS or EVIDENCE? Tom Schimmer, teacher and principal who is now authoring books and providing professional development around shifting to a Standards – Based Mindset asks these four questions. Is learning an EVENT or a PROCESS? Lead to O’Connor’s Fixes

31 Shift from Completion to Standards
Emphasize COMPLETION or STANDARDS? Tom Schimmer, teacher and principal who is now authoring books and providing professional development around shifting to a Standards – Based Mindset asks these four questions. Fix 3: Don’t add “extra” points Fix 4: Don’t punish with grades (dishonesty) Fix 5: Don’t reduce grade based on attendance Fix 6: Don’t include “group” scores Fix 7: Don’t organize by type but by standard Fix 8: Don’t grade unclear standards; provide clear expectations Fix 9: Don’t assign grades through comparison to others Fix 10: Don’t rely weak assessments; use quality assessments Fix 11: Don’t rely on mean; use other measures and professional judgment Fix 12: Don’t include 0s – use “I” for insufficient evidence and gather information to make determination. Fix 13: Don’t use formatives in grade; use only summative evidence Fix 14: Don’t summarize evidence over time; emphasize recent achievement Fix 15: Don’t leave students out of the learning process- they should play key roles in assessment process. Fix 1: Don’t include student behavior Fix 2: Don’t reduce score for late work Fix: 14: Don’t summarize evidence over time: emphasize recent achievement.

32 Shift from Activities to Learning
Is school about ACTIVITIES or LEARNING? Tom Schimmer, teacher and principal who is now authoring books and providing professional development around shifting to a Standards – Based Mindset asks these four questions. Fix 5: Don’t reduce grade based on attendance Fix 6: Don’t include “group scores” Fix 9: Don’t assign grades through comparison to others

33 Shift from Points to Evidence
Tom Schimmer, teacher and principal who is now authoring books and providing professional development around shifting to a Standards – Based Mindset asks these four questions. Fix 3: Don’t add “extra” points Fix 4: Don’t punish with grades (dishonesty) Fix 11: Don’t rely on the mean; use other measures and professional judgment Fix 12: Don’t include 0s – use “I” for insufficient evidence and gather information to make determinations

34 Shift from Event to Process
Is learning an EVENT or a PROCESS? Tom Schimmer, teacher and principal who is now authoring books and providing professional development around shifting to a Standards – Based Mindset asks these four questions. Fix 13: Don’t use formatives in grade; use only summative evidence Fix 15: Don’t leave students out of the learning process – they should play key roles in the assessment process”

35 Welcome, Encourage, Inspire to Build Confident Learners
Dweck: Praise Ted Talk TTThttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN34FNbOKXc Dweck


Download ppt "Power of Proficiency Scaling ATI Summer 2014"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google